Vienetų sistemos: skirtybės ir panašybės, tikros ir tariamos negerovės

PASTABOS, SVARSTYMAI, SIŪLYMAI, SMULKMENOS SYSTEMS OF UNITS: DIFFERENCES AND SIMILARITIES, REAL AND IMAGINARY SHORTCOMINGS The most relevant concerns here are quite concrete matters of terminology standardization, compliance with standards, and the Lithuanian character and correctness of terms, especially the terms for units in conventional systems of measurement. To clarify the meaning of such a system, we begin, at least to some extent, ab ovo. It then becomes clear not only that this is already the fourth system of units, but also that the first offers much to consider: clear, genuine, and even unexpected current issues, as well as interesting ethnolinguistic matters. I. Natural and artificial units If it is claimed that the extent of science is measured by the extent of measurement, then human beings have been inclined toward science since time immemorial—or, more precisely, driven to it by the exigencies of life. Yet primitive civilizations’ understanding of the world relied in the most elementary way on people themselves and the empirical experience of their lives, whereas exact science concerned the essences of natural phenomena studied theoretically and experimentally. There is a fundamental commonality—the basis is natural—but the difference is fundamental too. What has become most firmly established (and is compulsory in science) is an entirely artificial system of units: the metric system. 1. Natural folk measures—derived from the human body and its life. The saying homo mensura – man is the measure of all things (Antikos žodynas 1998: 155, Halder 2002) is attributed to the philosopher Protagoras (who also made great contributions to grammar; his works have not survived—it is conjectured that they were publicly burned), without knowing its continuation—of things that are, that they are, and of things that are not, that they are not (Halder 2002)—or the commentary, “it is no longer the state that determines what a person must do and what is forbidden, but the person themself” (Antikos žodynas 1998: 155); it is arbitrarily, though quite plausibly, interpreted… metrologically as well. In fact, many folk measures in various regions are derived from the human body: foot, step, fathom, measure, cubit, embrace, span, palm, wrist, handful, finger (across), klupsnis, “from the tip of the big toe to the first joint” DŽ. Around Pilviškiai, people would measure the flail’s striking head against themselves with clenched fists: – Where are you going? – To the forest. – For what? – Wood. – What kind? – 143 Skroblaitis. – Kami? – Bruožči LKŽ XII 1981: 1092. Pirštas matuojamas ne tik lašinių storumas kaime – net mokslinė anatomija turi terminą dýlikapirštė žarna. Panašių yra ir kitakalbių: colio (iš vok. Zoll „muitas“ – iš gr. telos „mokestis“) rusiškas pavadinimas duom yra iš ol. duym „nykštys“; senovės graikų sidabrinė moneta ir svorio vienetas drachmė – „sauja“. Žinoma, pradžioje tai buvo apytiksliai matai. Other approximate natural folk measures also existed: pole, or rod, stone, ladle, small ladle, karis, barrel, ploughland, borrowed birkavas (from the Norman city of Birka—10 pūdai), stuopa, gorčius, margas, ūbas. Svaras stands out, being related to the act of weighing, as do the borrowed terms pūdas, valakas. Some units in different countries have similar bases: the Roman jūgeris, “as much land as a pair of oxen (Latin iugum [that is, a yoke]) can plough in a day” (Antikos žodynas 1998: 398; the form jugeras here is incorrect)—margas, “an area that a person can plough or mow before noon” (Morgen means “morning”)—the 13th–16th-century Baltic žagrė, “an area of arable land worked in a year by a pair of oxen or a horse”; svaras (weigh)—Greek tálanton, “weight”—the Slavic borrowing pūdas, derived from Scandinavian pund, “pound” (cf. English pound, “pound,” Latin pondus, “weight; a weight, a counterweight” (from pendō, “I weigh,” cf. pendeo, “I hang,” perpendeo, “I weigh out,” perpendicularum, “plumb line”); the Romans left us a small unit of weight, the granas (0.065 g), from Latin granum, “grain; little grain.” Thus they counted (rather than weighed) in grains, and even today people from Suvalkija tease a miser: “he even counts the grains, how many to put in the pot” (Pilviškiai). Later, the values of these measures were fixed by standards. However, standards too differed according to peoples and countries, or periods. For example, the stadion (from which stadium is also derived) varied considerably in ancient Greece: the Pythian was 165 m, the Delphic 177 m, the Attic 184.98 m, the Olympian 192 m, and the Ionian 210 m. Legend has it that the length of the stadium track (straight, not circular as it is now) was one stadion—600 of Heracles’ feet (the Attic stadion was 625 Greek feet), but it is unclear why the foot of each Greek hero was different. It was hardly Greek in origin, and hardly derived from the foot as a measure, since it was already used in Babylonia (195 m). The stadion is very interesting. ¹ In the translated TŽŽ editions of 1951 and 1969, margas (Polish morg), “a land measure in Poland, approximately equal to 0.56 ha,” is ineptly distinguished in TŽŽ 1969 from morgenas (German Morgen), “a land measure in Germany (0.26–0.36 ha) and in some countries of South Africa (0.6 ha),” TŽŽ 1960 (neither term appears in later TŽŽ editions, since neither is an international word). 144 the value’s natural interpretation is the distance a person walks while the disk of the rising sun, from the moment its edge appears, fully emerges above the horizon (rather similarly motivated are the Persian farsang and the Hellenized pursang—“the distance a person walks in an hour”). The Romans defined the stadium in their own way—as 125 double paces. The Roman-origin mile—Latin mille passūs (passuum)—is a thousand double paces. Later still, natural folk measures were also expressed in units of the metric system; for example, the mile—1478.7 m. The mile—land, or postal mile (mi), of Great Britain, the USA, and other Anglo-Saxon countries is 1609.344 m. Here, the length of a pace is taken into account. When calculated in the metric system, however, the mile was also based on other units of that system: thus the geographical mile—the length of 1/15° of the Earth’s equatorial arc—diverged greatly, measuring 7421.6 m (in Russia and Lithuania, the mile is 7467.4 m); the nautical mile lengthened much less—it is the length of a 1' arc of a geographic meridian at 45° latitude—measuring 1852.3 m (at the latitude of England, 1853.18 m). Since 1929, the international nautical mile (INM) has been 1852 m. The human-scale unit of a ship’s speed, the knot (kn), is 1/120 of a nautical mile: the length of a log line (a rope with a floating anchor) paid out astern by a sailor over 30 seconds—1.852 km/h. Metric equivalents of folk measures differ greatly from one region to another: the margas in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania was 0.71 ha; in Lithuania Minor, 0.25 to 0.56 ha; in Užnemunė, from 1819, the Polish one was 0.56 ha. A grain talent weighed 25.5–26.2 kg of copper (equivalent to an 8.5 g gold ring); in other eastern regions it was heavier, while the biblical one was 41.4 kg. The pood was 16.3805 kg, whereas the pound varied considerably: the Roman (libra) was 327 g; the Lithuanian pound (until 1920), 365.47 g; the Russian pound used in Lithuania during the tsarist period, 409.512 g; the standard Russian pound, 374.158 g; the Berlin pound, 374.72 g; the Klaipėda pound, 413.05 g; the Prussian pound before 1839, 467.711 g; the new Polish pound used in Užnemunė from 1815, 405.504 g; the Great British and American avoirdupois pound (lb av), 453.592 g; and the apothecaries’ pound, 358.323 g. 2. The pound sterling and the Troy ounce. The pound is also money: the British pound sterling – pound sterling (though known by the Latin libra – Stg £) means “a full-value pound, that is, one of pure, specified fineness”; the Irish, Egyptian, Cypriot, Lebanese, and Syrian pound (formerly also used in Australia, New Zealand, Peru, South Africa, Rhodesia, Sudan, Uganda, Zambia, etc.), the Italian and Vatican lira (L), and the Maltese (Lm) and Turkish (TL) lira also mean “pound”; so does the French livre of the 9th–18th centuries (French livre)—also “pound” (replaced in 1795 by the decimal-system unit, the franc). The pound sterling is a traditional name; its meaning is 145 “the monetary unit of Great Britain, equal to 100 pence” (TŽŽ 2001) (the so-called new pence; until 1971, 20 shillings or 240 pence, LTE X 1983)—has become detached from its original meaning: English sterling means “of specified fineness, pure, full-value”; sterling: 1. archaic, “a measure of fineness and weight in England: gold—11/12, silver—0.925 (after 1920—1/2); until 1526 it was divided into 160 weight pennies”; 2. archaic, “an English silver coin minted from 1180; in the 13th century equal to a silver pound, or 20 silver pence, that is, one gold penny” (Buračas 1999), otherwise great penny (LTE X 1983). Incidentally, such a divergence is characteristic of many old names—florin, gulden, zloty… Sterling now simply means “the fineness of English silver and gold coins” (DŽ₄). Smaller and larger units are often linked numerically: the Roman double pace—5 feet; the ordinary fathom (bridge measure)—6 feet—1.95 m; the great fathom—9 feet—2.84 m; the rod—7.5 cubits—4.87 m; a cubit—1.5 feet; a foot—16 fingers; a stone—40 Lithuanian pounds—about 14–15 kg; a pood—40 pounds. There is even such a coefficient unit as the ounce: Latin uncia means “a twelfth part” (even, for example, of an inheritance). For example: an jugerum ounce is 209.91 m²; a foot-ounce is 24.6 mm (incidentally, close to an inch—25.4 mm); an as (a copper pound—about 327 g) ounce is 27.25 g; the Roman pound-ounce (for weight, 27.116 g; for coinage, 27.288 g). The pound ounce spread to other countries too: the French one (French once, known since 1138) was 30.594 g; in Great Britain and the USA, the avoirdupois ounce was 28.3495 g (the fluid ounce: Great Britain—28.4123 ml; USA—29.5729 ml); the apothecaries’ and jewellers’, or Troy, ounce was 31.1035 g. The Troy ounce is not only a jewellers’ and apothecaries’ measure, but also a measure used on the commodity exchange: there is also the Troy pound—12 Troy ounces—373.242 g (while 16 Troy ounces make a British pound—453.592 g), and the Troy drachm—3.888 g (8 make an ounce), and the Troy grain—0.065 g (60 make a drachm). Strictly speaking, the Troy ounce is nonsense (what has the historical Troy, burned down forty times over three millennia ago, got to do with this?!), just like the pound sterling (there is no such thing as sterling anymore). The difference is that pound sterling does not invite variations or dispute—it is a traditional term. Troy—English Troy, adjective Trojan (rare variant Troyan): Trojan horse – Trojos arklys. But the Troy ounce is troy ounce / ounce troy, and the Troy pound is troy pound / pound troy. There is also simply troy—“a system of weights in which 12 troy ounces make a pound, <…>” (Webster’s Comprehensive Dictionary 1996), as well as troy weight—“a series of units of weight, based on a pound of 12 ounces and the ounce of 146 20 pennyweights or 480 grains—0.3732417266 kg* (Webster’s Dictionary Unabridged 1981); the adjective troy is derived from French Troyes (Lithuanian Trua)—“city in France where it was prob. introduced” (though its use is restricted—“expressed in troy weight,” Webster’s Dictionary Unabridged 1981), specifically associated with the unit of weight used at the fairs held there (Webster’s Comprehensive Dictionary 1996). The monetary specialist A. Buračas has rendered it differently on three occasions (partly even in English): troy ounce – trojos (monetinė) uncija, troy – trojos (precious metals and gemstones) weight system (Buračas 1980); in 1994 he does not even specify the ounce, and calls the 373.242 g pound the precious-goods pound (Buračas, Svecevičius 1994: 479); Troy Ounce—“a measure of the weight of gold and other precious metals, the Troy (in France) ounce, equal to 31.1035 g or 1/12 of a Tr. pound, or 480 grains” (Buračas 1999). Troy in France is a geographical discovery… Troy is French Troie, whereas the historic center of Champagne in France is Troyes. Troyes is associated with the Celtic tribe of the Tricastini (Latin Tricastini, French Tricasses, English Tricasse) and their town, called Augustobona in the Roman Empire, renamed Tricassium in the 3rd century and Trecæ in the 5th (Dictionnaire des noms propres 1995). Incidentally, the very people who gave that name attribute it all to their neighbors: troy—“Name given in England to the series of weights used for gold and silver” (Dictionnaire encyclopédique 1900); today it is not even mentioned there (it is absent from Dictionnaire de la langue française 1993). Nor do the Poles include it in the French section (it is absent from Słownik języka polskiego 1967 and Encyklopedia powszechna 1968). The Germans distinguish the terms—trojanisches Pferd, but Troygewicht—as do the Russians: троянский конь, but тройская унция. Perhaps it was understood as a triple or apothecaries’ ounce (DokŽin 1988: 122), and likewise a triple or apothecaries’ pound (DokŽin 1988: 123)—supposedly triple (gold, silver, gemstones), though this reasoning could also “justify” a quadruple system (pound, ounce, drachm, grain). The idea of a threefold system had also been used earlier, though without the word triple: troy—“a system of weights (for gold, silver, gemstones)” (ALKŽ 1975). As early as 1953, troy pound is recorded (LE I 1953: 424). There is also a Lithuanianized troy: troy weight—“the troy system of weights (in Britain)” (ALKŽ 1998). The Troy ounce has been and remains widespread (LTE X 1983, VLE I 2001: 216 (nx), 217). TŽŽ 2001 has Troy ounce and Troy drachm, but Troy grain. Already available, too, is the closest-to-accurate variant: apothecaries’ ounce, Trua ounce (oz tr, oz ap); apothecaries’ pound, Trua pound (lb tr, lb ap); apothecaries’ drachm, Trua drachm (dr tr, dr ap)—3.88793 g (TechEnc I 2000: 660). But why put apothecaries’ first and not Trua, when the abbreviation is first tr, then ap? 147 And why not Titus, after all? Of course, this is an incorrect (but widespread) spelling—VLE III even has Caesarean section, although until now even in the press it was always spelled Cezario pjūvis. Thus the tradition of the Troy ounce persists, along with a host of variants, and the genuine root trų is also revived. A decision by the State Commission of the Lithuanian Language may be needed here. 3. Funt, foot, inch and other Germanic Russisms. Lithuanians do not borrow the names of measures they already have themselves. Some languages, however, have done otherwise. Russian, which had accumulated such loanwords, passed some of them on to us during the Soviet era. The most inhumane Russism, spread most widely by inept translators, was funt (Russian фунт comes from Polish funt, which in turn comes from Middle High German phunt, corresponding to German Pfund, derived from Latin pondus). The Lithuanian foot fared better, as did the old loanword colis. But in 1988, the Guide to Document Preparation and Spelling was awash with Russisms: funt – 453.6 g, troy or avoirdupois pound – 373.2 g, stone – 14 funtų DokŽin 1988: 123, futas = 12 inches – 0.3048 m, diuiimas – 2.54 cm DokŽin 1988: 122. This is a table of British and US units, but these are actually not Anglicisms but Russisms; only фунт ir стоп are of English origin (English foot means “foot,” stone means “stone”), while funtas is German and diuiimas Dutch (English inch; incidentally, K. Gaivenis has also found the foreign form inčas in translations...). The table also gives Lithuanian names in parentheses: funtas (Lithuanian svaras (obsolete) – 409 g) DokŽin 1988: 123, futas (Lithuanian pėda – 22.2 cm (= 32.5 cm)), diuiimas (Lithuanian colis) DokŽin 1988: 122. In short, faced with different values for Lithuanian and English measures, they were unable to express it in Lithuanian as English pound, English stone, English foot. But why was diuiimas included too—its value is no different from that of the colis. 4. Natural scientific units. There are some natural folk measures that are international (mostly ancient), but none are universal. Thus, some are suitable for international trade and other broader practical uses, but none are suitable for science. Science has created and continues to develop an international system of units, in which the dimensions of physical quantities are “chosen so as to be convenient to use,” while the units are “freely chosen and independent,” LTE XII 1984. This is the metric, or decimal, system of units. The name metric is rather ambiguous—metric derives not from metro (metre), but from Greek metron—“measure,” and metreō—“I measure.” Decimal means that units may be multiples or fractions—multiplied or divided by powers of ten. 148 They are multiplied or divided by powers of ten. The foundations of this system were laid by a commission of the most distinguished French scientists. By decree of the National Assembly on March 30, 1791, the unit of length metre was approved, freely chosen but entirely unnatural—the 1/40,000,000th (one forty-millionth) part of the Paris meridian; the unit of mass (in everyday terms, weight), the kilogram, was defined as 1 dm³ of distilled water at 4 °C in a vacuum (a more natural, but entirely different, basis of measurement would be some fraction of the Earth’s mass). In 1795, a centesimal monetary unit, the franc, was also introduced, while the pound sterling became decimal only in 1971. Here we can clearly see the differing characters of nations: English conservatism and naturalness, French innovativeness, even revolutionary spirit and artificiality (this difference is clearly visible in garden design—the geometric, or formal—French garden, and the landscape, or naturalistic, otherwise free-form—English garden, LTE VIII 1981). In 1851, K. F. Gauss and W. E. Webcris, following the former’s idea and original model, created a symmetrical system of units—CGS (centimetre, gram, second) system of units—but it never became universal, although it “is still used in theoretical work in physics and astronomy,” VLE III 2003. In 1875, 17 countries signed the Metric Convention. In Lithuania, the metric system was introduced on May 25, 1920. Thus, the metre is the most artificial unit, while the kilogram is a base unit, but a multiple. Yet the idea of naturalness remained alive. Of course, natural things include not only the human body and everyday life, but also measures of physical phenomena. In science, natural systems of units are “systems of units whose base units are physical constants, <...>” (the gravitational constant, the speed of light in a vacuum, etc.); thus, here “the dimension depends on natural phenomena,” LTE VIII 1981. Various such units and systems were developed in the early 20th century by the German M. Planck and the Englishman D. R. Hartree. For example, the Hartree unit of mass is the electron’s rest mass—9.109534·10⁻³¹ kg (LTE IV 1978). These units differ greatly in value from metric units—some are extraordinarily small, others extraordinarily large. They were not designed for practical use. However, they also influenced the International System of Units, or SI (French Système International), approved in 1960 by the 11th General Conference on Weights and Measures (GMSK), LTE XII 1984. For example, that artificial unit, the metre, is now physically defined as “the distance travelled by light in a vacuum in 1/299792458 of a second” (the 17th GMSK, 1983), TechEnc I 2000: 648. The old heat unit, the degree on the Celsius scale (based on the freezing and boiling points of water) has a fairly natural basis; it is now a derived unit of the international system 149 whose base unit is the kelvin (273.15° higher); incidentally, this too is natural, being based on the second law of thermodynamics. Natural units are found in astronomy: parsec, year, light-year. Thus, natural units arise from the very essence of science. II. True – physical, natural, actual and converted (reduced, equivalent, reference) – conventional units You can plow with tractors rated at nearly 15 HP and 100 HP – these are physical tractors. One person may have 10 15-HP tractors, another 10 100-HP tractors – surely they do not have the same amount? With the same tractor, one can plow 10 ha of stubble (shallow plowing), 10 ha of potato field (deep plowing), and break up 10 ha of virgin land – natural hectares are equal here, but are plowing hectares equal? A ton of rye or a ton of wheat – actual tons are equal, but are yield and value equal? Thus, to determine the actual situation, a comparative measure is needed. This is no statistical whim; it is a necessity. Thirty years ago, the publication Agricultural Information (ŽŪI) already featured a natural hectare, a natural ton, a natural ŽŪI index 1972 10 36. It also already had a coefficient for converting physical tractors into conventional ones ŽŪI 1972 10 36. The distinction being made is stated clearly: To assess farming conditions more objectively, conventional rather than actual labor remuneration is used ŽŪ 1975 1 9. Also already in use were converted and reduced: приведённые затраты – converted (reduced) costs ETŽ 1966. It is characteristic of our old town that the greatest traffic flows (more than 800 reduced vehicles per hour in one direction) move along the narrowest <…> streets T 1973 228 2. At first, it was not simply conventional, but conventional natural: условный натуральный измеритель продукции – conventional natural measure of output ETŽ 1966. There were not only specific conventional units (conventional hectares, conventional tons, and so on), but also conventional units: about 19 centners of conventional crop units are obtained from each hectare of agricultural land T 1974 147 2. 10 million conventional units of drainage pipes T 1973 285 1. <…> 221 million tonnes of mineral fertilizers produced (in conventional units) LŪ 1975 4 122². 2 For this purpose, the polysemous word virtual was formerly used – “possible; capable of occurring; which is to occur”: virtual length – railway. “the conventional length of a straight horizontal section 150 The conventional fat content of milk has long been called the base value (3.5, 3.8%, or another specified value). A dairy product with specified fat (2.5, 3.5, or 4.5%), protein, and other component levels (not natural milk, but made to resemble it) is called standardized milk. There are other base values, for example: natural gas of standard calorific value LA 1993 74 4. Energy consumption is sometimes expressed in tonnes of oil equivalent. Standard fuel is “fuel whose lower heating value in the USSR is considered equal to 29.3 MJ/kg (7000 kcal/kg)” LTE X 1983; also LTE IV 1978: 263. This method of conversion took hold and spread—there was even a conventional animal ŽŪ 1974 2 33, a conventional head of cattle T 1973 162 1, 167 1, 1974 254 1, ŽŪ 1974 9 34. It spread quickly, but the terminology did not stabilize for quite some time—even dictionaries commonly had the calque conditional: conditional fuel – условное монливо ChTŽ 1960, but ETŽ 1966 had standard fuel, while ŽUTŽ 1971 again had conditional fuel; conditional timber, “a unit of timber accounting used to simplify accounting” – условный материал – bedingtes Holz MATŽ 1971 (MTŽ 1998 – standard timber, “a timber concept used to simplify accounting for wood drying, corresponding to the following indicators: pine boards of drying quality class II, 40 mm thick, 150 mm wide, over 1 m long, with an initial moisture content of 60% and a final moisture content of 12%” – условный пиломатериал – Einheitsholz – conventional wood, wood in boards), нахота мягкая – conditional (soft) plowing ŽŪTŽ 1971; conditional fabric width TkstTŽ 1962. In the periodical press, conventional and conditional varied widely: conventional hectares T 1973 246 1, 1974 157 2, Šv 1973 7 9, ŽŪ 1974 2 5, 6, plowed 2,200 hectares of conventional plowing T 1973 107 1 – harvested 190 conditional hectares of grain T 1973 203 1; conventional tractor ŽŪ 1974 2 14, 15, conventional unit T 1973 144 1, 1974 160 1; standard fuel T 1973 167 2, 190 4 – conditional fuel T 1973 83 4; conventional ton 1974 125 4 – conditional tons MG 1974 5 11; mineral fertilizers – 4.9 million tons (in conditional units) T 1973 248 3; of the road, for which the same amount of work (the same amount of time and fuel) is consumed as for the actual stretch of road with all its rises” TŽŽ 1951, virtual temperature of moist air – “the temperature that dry air of the same density would have at the existing pressure” TŽŽ 1969. Nowadays, conventional road length GeĮž 1977, reduced temperature PTŽ 1984, while virtual has taken on new polysemies (see GK 2003 8 6–7). 151 managed to save <…> nearly three thousand conventional cubic metres of process timber T 1982 44 1 – drainage pipes produced – 601 conventional kilometres T 1973 96 2; nominal diameter T 1973 230 1, 239 1, Šv 1973 23 2, nominal diameter T 1973, 168 3; standard pipes T 1973 223 2 – standard drainage tubes T 1973 230 1; standard containers Šv 1974 5 3, M ir T 1975 2 2 – standard containers T 1973 219 2; standard boxes T 1973 158 2 – standard boxes T 1973 249 3; also standard jar T 1973 255 2, standard bricks T 1973 249 1, 1974 173 1, standard blocks T 1974 173 1, standard sheets T 1973 249 1. Often it was simply conventional, e.g.: Each metre per second of wind speed keeps increasing the severity of the frost by a corresponding amount. There are days when, with severe frost and strong wind, the frost reaches minus one hundred conventional degrees MG 1974 5 18; conventional savings M ir T 1973 11 16, conventional economic effect M ir T 1974 6 36. In a 1975 article, Standard Accounting Terms, Antanas Balašaitis noted that Russian условный “is translated by various words: standard, conditional, equation-based, relative, artificial, and so on,” while “the measurement units under discussion do not depend on any objective conditions nor arise from them, but are a matter of agreement among economists and planners” (Balašaitis 1975: 18). A. Balašaitis’s short article had an effect: the meanings of the words conditional and standard were clarified in dictionaries and encyclopedias. Conditional was already explained in DŽ₁,₂ with the example conditional agreement. Even the school-taught conditioned reflex, and, more narrowly, conditional (as opposed to universal) retraction of stress, conditional probability, equality, equation, conditional zero, average; conditional deposits: so called because a certain condition is established when the account is opened, restricting the withdrawal of the deposit, and the depositor can use such a deposit only after fulfilling the stipulated condition T 1982 179 4. Conditional also has sense 3: “not actually existing, imagined, symbolic,” LKŽ XII, e.g.: let us try to find out what fate will befall the “five-billionth child” (what is meant is not the hypothetical child whose birth was marked in Yugoslavia by a UN resolution, but children of the same age in various regions, who are equally hypothetical) T 1988 77 3. Here conditional is also appropriate, though terminology generally uses conditional: a contingent asset is “an asset whose value cannot be determined precisely at present, since it depends on future events and conditions”; conditional sale, conditional deposit ŠETEŽ. There are also phrases whose meanings are not entirely clear: facultative anaerobe – conditional, facultative anaerobe ALŽŪTŽ 1977. 152 LKŽ XIV 1986 standard, -ė 3. “adopted as the basis for calculating the scope of some work, resources, etc.; standard, reference,” DŽ, standard 3. “agreed upon as a unit of accounting, a basis”: standard units, deposits. It is now clear that the latter definition lacks precision: it omits the semantic component “recalculated using a value coefficient.” There can also be standard units that have not been recalculated; for example, a distinction is made between the true value (of a quantity)—“the value we would obtain by making a perfect measurement”—but “true values are not known,” and therefore there is also a conventional true value (of a quantity)—English conventional true value (of a quantity), French valeur conventionnellement vraie (d’une grandeur)—“to determine the conventional true value, results from several measurements of that quantity are most often used” (“sometimes it is called the normative value, the best estimate of the value, the conventional value, or the reference value”) TP ir BMTŽ 1997. The word standard has still more meanings, e.g.: contract price, contractual interest, contractual obligations, contract work, etc. A. Balašaitis’s article had a greater effect on those who were more receptive and understanding. For example: both условный гектар, and эталонный гектар, and условный эталонный гектар – standard hectare ŽŪMTŽ 1983, условная единица – standard unit PTŽ 1984, условное топливо – standard fuel PTŽ 1984, also LTE X 1983; 200 thousand roubles in standard annual savings T 1981 8 1. However, “conditional” also remained common: conditional animal T 1983 299 2, conditional head of cattle T 1985 198 1, conditional livestock production Šv 1975 10 12; from <…> hectares <…> an average of 28.5 centners of conditional crop production was obtained T 1984 101 1; we gave 100 cows and 100 heifers – one hundred and fifty conditional cattle M ir G 1976 4 36; conditional tonnes T 1977 231 2; mineral fertilizers – millions of tonnes: recalculated into units containing 100 percent nutrients T 1976 26 4; conditional family KV 1980 47 6, conditional inhabitants Šm 1983 6 11, conditional economic effect M ir G 1978 10 11; “a metre per second ‘adds’ two conditional degrees of frost” T 1979 200 2; at 45 conditional degrees of frost, or, as they are often called, conditional severity points, a person can barely endure it T 1979 200 2. The third period in the use of names for standard (conditional) accounting measures came after Lithuania’s national revival. Specialists continued using the terms as before. Unfortunately, the unacceptable “conditional” became even more frequent: conditional fuel M ir G 1995 4 12, conditional bricks LA 1995 217 12. Some saw this as a spectre of the Soviet era: “During the Soviet era, a statistical trick was well known—counting standard units. They would plough not just a hectare, but a standard one; they would produce standard 153 jars of jam, and raise a certain number of standard cattle per standard hectare” (Valentina Zinkevičienė, – LA 1997 36 5). Not at all—they had both physical and standard units calculated from them; neither replaced the other. There were tricks, but of a different kind (padding figures, writing figures off, and so on). And what came of this criticism? It led to the following: On average, one tractor (regardless of its power) has 77 hectares of agricultural land assigned to it here LA 1997 53 9. Is one unable—or afraid (a trick?)—even to write physical tractor? Some soon got over this fear: conditional models LA 1997 38 9, conditional bricks LA 1997 180 22, but “standard” was once again pushed aside. Some still grumble: In Lithuania, an average of about 80 hectares of agricultural land is assigned to one tractor (regardless of its power), while in EU countries it is only about 20 hectares ML 2002 11 19. Terminologists and language-culture advocates have once again been given pointless work… ŠALTINIAI ALKŽ 1975 – A. Laučka, B. Piesarskas, E. Stasiulevičiūtė. Anglų–lietuvių kalbų žodynas, Vilnius. ALKŽ 1998 – B. Svecevičius. Anglų–lietuvių kalbų žodynas, Vilnius. ALŽŪTŽ – Anglų–lietuvių kalbų žemės ūkio terminų žodynas. Sudarė D. ČepOnienė, R. Gelūnienė, J. Kazėnas, R. Kelbauskienė (ats. red.), Vilnius, 1977. ChTŽ – K. Daukšas. Chemijos žodynas, Vilnius, 1960. DokŽin – Dokumentų įforminimo ir rašybos žinynas. Sudarė J. Žemaitis, Vilnius, 1988. DŽ – Dabartinės lietuvių kalbos žodynas: DŽ₁ – I leid., Vilnius, 1954; DŽ₂ – II pap. leid., Vilnius, 1972; DŽ₃ – III pat. ir pap. leid., Vilnius, 1993; DŽ₄ – IV leid., Vilnius, 2000. ETŽ – Rusiškai lietuviškas ekonomikos terminų žodynas. Red. kol. K. Meškauskas (ats. red.), A. Poviliūnas, V. Puronas, A. Skupėika, Vilnius, 1966. GelŽ – Rusų–lietuvių kalbų geležinkelių transporto žodynas. Sudarė N. Juškaitė, St. Keinys, Vilnius, 1997. GK – Gimtoji kalba (žurnalas). KV – Kalba Vilnius (savaitraštis). LA – Lietuvos aidas (savaitraštis). LE – Lietuvių enciklopedija 1, South Boston, 1953. LKŽ – Lietuvių kalbos žodynas 12, 14, Vilnius, 1981, 1986. LTE – Lietuviškoji tarybinė enciklopedija 4, 7, 8, 10, 12, Vilnius, 1978, 1981, 1981, 1983, 1984. LŪ – Liaudies ūkis (žurnalas). MATŽ – Aiškinamasis medienos apdirbimo terminų žodynas, Vilnius, 1971. MG – mūsų gamta (žurnalas). 154 M ir G – Mokslas ir gyvenimas (žurnalas). M ir T – Mokslas ir technika (žurnalas). ML – Mokslo Lietuva (dvisavaitinis laikraštis). MTŽ – Aiškinamasis medienos terminų žodynas. Ats. red. B. Papreckis, Kaunas, 1998. PTŽ – Rusų–lietuvių kalbų politechnikos žodynas. Sudarė G. Daugėla, Vilnius, 1984. ŠETEŽ – P. Austrevičius, D. Pupkevičius, D. Treigienė. Šiuolaikinių ekonomikos terminų enciklopedinis žodynas, Vilnius, 1991. Šm – Šeima (žurnalas). Šv – Švyturys (žurnalas). T – Tiesa (dienraštis). TechEnc – Technikos enciklopedija 1, Vilnius, 2000. TkstTŽ – Aiškinamasis tekstilės terminų žodynas 1. Sudarė A. Jurevičius ir A. Čižas, Vilnius, 1962. TP ir BMTŽ – Tarptautinis pagrindinių ir bendrųjų metrologijos terminų žodynas. Parengė V. Valiukėnas ir P. J. Žilinskas, Vilnius, 1977. TŽŽ 1951 – Tarptautinių žodžių žodynas. Lietuviškąjį leidimą redagavo Ch. Lemchenas, Vilnius. TŽŽ 1969 – Tarptautinių žodžių žodynas. Lietuviškąjį leidimą redagavo Ch. Lemchenas, Vilnius. TŽŽ 2001 – Tarptautinių žodžių žodynas. Ats. red. A. Kinderys, Vilnius. VLE – Visuotinė lietuvių enciklopedija 1, 3, Vilnius, 2001, 2003. ŽŪ – Žemės ūkis (žurnalas). ŽŪI – Žemės ūkio informacija (mėnraštis). ŽŪMTŽ – Rusų–lietuvių kalbų žemės ūkio mechanizacijos terminų žodynas. Parengė V. Gerulaitis ir S. Lukėnas, Vilnius, 1983. ŽŪTŽ – V. Anskaitis, M. Kilas. Rusų–lietuvių kalbų žemės ūkio terminų žodynas, Vilnius, 1971. LITERATŪRA Antikos žodynas 1998: Antikos žodynas. Vertė R. Kumžienė, A. Tekorius, A. Trakymas, Vilnius. Bal ašaitis A. 1975: Sutartiniai apskaitos terminai. – Mūsų kalba 2, 17–18. Buračas A. 1980: Anglų–lietuvių kalbų ekonomikos terminų žodynas, Vilnius. Buračas A. 1990: Pasaulio valstybių ir monetų žinynas, Vilnius. Buračas A., Svecevičius B. 1994: Lietuvių–anglų–lietuvių biznio, bankų, biržos terminų žodynas-žinynas, Vilnius. Dictionnaire de la langue française 1993: Le Nouveau Petit Robert: Dictionnaire alphabétique et analogique de la langue française, Paris. Dictionnaire des noms propres 1995: Petit Le Robert: Dictionnaire universel des noms propres, Paris. Dictionnaire encyclopédique [1900?]: Le Larousse pour tous: Nouveau dictionnaire encyclopédique 2, Paris. Encyklopedia powszechna 1968: Wielka encyklopedia powszechna 11, Warszawa. 155 Halder A. 2002: Filosofijos žodynas, Vilnius. Słownik języka polskiego 1967: Słownik języka polskiego 9, Warszawa. Webster’s Comprehensive Dictionary 1996: The New International Webster’s Comprehensive Dictionary of the English Language, Trident Press International. Webster’s Dictionary Unabridged 1981: Webster’s Third New International Dictionary of the English Language Unabridged, Springfield, Massachusetts. Jonas KLIMAVIČIUS Gauta 2003-06-24 Lietuvių kalbos institutas P. Vileišio g. 5, LT-2055 Vilnius E. paštas [email protected] 156